Wednesday, 15 September 2021

 Mr GRIMLEY (Western Victoria) (12:39): I move:

That this house:

(1)   notes that:

(a) frontline emergency services have a higher rate of mental illness as a result of their work;

(b) WorkSafe provides compensation for a range of reasons, including mental health injuries as a result of work;

(c) WorkSafe’s non-established, new or emerging treatments and services (NENETS) policy provides an avenue for contemporary treatments and services, including psychiatric assistance dogs and equine therapy, to be assessed on a case-by-case basis;

(d) it can take approximately nine months to approve a psychiatric assistance dog claim to treat post-traumatic stress injuries (PTSI), as opposed to a 27-day average for general mental health claims and a seven-day average for physical injury claims;

(e) WorkSafe have previously approved psychiatric assistance dogs to treat PTSI; however, this policy does not hold precedent and is not legislated, meaning that each claimant must undergo an extensive and exhaustive legal process, causing additional financial and emotional stress;

(f) the Department of Veterans Affairs has a psychiatric assistance dogs program to treat veterans with PTSI and many animal therapy approaches have yielded extremely positive results;

(g) the terminology of post-traumatic stress ‘injury’ is preferred by sufferers, rather than the outdated term ‘disorder’;

(2)   calls on the government to:

(a) review its NENETS policy to ensure future claims for canine and equine therapies treating PTSI are considered without delay and not unfairly denied in the future; and

(b) ensure WorkSafe’s NENETS policy is recorded publicly to allow transparency for those seeking claims and their legal representatives.

It was 37 years ago that Ron Fenton was shot in the back of the head in the line of duty whilst working for Victoria Police. Thirty-seven bullet fragments would stay lodged in his brain. These were not the only challenges Ron would experience in his lifetime. He was bitten by a man claiming to have HIV, he was asked to recover a baby’s corpse from Williamstown Beach and he witnessed the everyday tragedies we experience as police. Victoria Police number 18343’s 40-year Victoria Police career was particularly eventful and unfortunately very damaging.

Despite all of these events, Ron’s long battle with post-traumatic stress injury, or as you will hear me call it, PTSI, truly began when he was assaulted by a notorious criminal outside a Werribee nightclub in 2008. The offender threatened to, and I quote, ‘get a gun and do a better job than Kai’. This was a reference to the man who had murdered a security guard in 1984 before opening fire on Ron’s police car in Beaumaris, where he would almost die. He was the man responsible for those 37 bullet fragments in Ron’s skull.

During 2017, and as a result of Ron’s declining mental state, Yogi came into Ron’s life courtesy of the Defence Bank’s Defence Community Dogs program and Ron being eligible as a previous serving member of the army reserves. Yogi the chocolate labrador would change Ron’s life. Yogi was rescued from a pound and sent to Bathurst prison in New South Wales, where he was trained by Benni, a prisoner serving time for drug offences. Benni met Ron a few times to understand his medical issues and his triggers, and he trained Yogi to respond to Ron’s triggers when they arose. I will talk about the defence dogs a bit more later. Yogi was taught to sense Ron’s emotions, including turning the light on at night when he was having night terrors, putting a paw on him when he was anxiously bouncing his leg and asking him to play ball when Ron’s mood dipped.

Before getting Yogi, Ron attempted suicide five times—something he was very open about. He was using 17 psychotropic drugs daily to curb his PTSI symptoms and had been admitted to hospital many times, where he would stay for a week or two. Although Yogi was funded through the Defence Bank, the ongoing costs of maintaining Yogi were met by Ron. To alleviate the financial burden Ron applied to have Yogi’s costs claimed through WorkSafe as a legitimate medical expense related to his workplace-induced PTSI. He said, and I quote:

I figured I should ask for WorkCover to pay for my dog, because he is my medication.

Ron made a claim to WorkCover and was optimistic, for he described there was head nodding at the meeting he had with WorkSafe. But three weeks later he received a letter in the mail—a rejection of claim. They cited a lack of evidence behind companion dogs for this decision. But Yogi is not a companion dog, he is a trained psychiatric assistance dog. Then, in the words of Ron, and I quote:

Imagine my surprise when, I get woken by my Barrister Fiona Ryan by phone … She’s at the Pre-hearing Conference between barristers for both sides. WorkSafe have walked in with a prepared offer. A set cash amount as recompense for past expenditure, nothing going forward, closure of the claim, and a Non-Disclosure Agreement.

Needless to say, what questionable behaviour by WorkSafe. In typical Ron fashion, he made it clear that he would not be agreeing to any NDAs under any circumstances. After much back and forth a deal was struck. WorkSafe agreed to pay for Yogi’s expenses from the day Ron brought him home until the day that Yogi would cease to perform his duties. WorkSafe also agreed to cover the costs for a replacement dog as long as that dog came from an accredited provider. Ron’s lawyer, Kathy Wilson, said, and I quote:

On the day before it was listed, WorkCover offered us everything Ron was asking for (which he accepted) so there was no reason to proceed and [therefore] WorkCover avoided the precedent.

What a coincidence. Yogi’s law was supposed to have been formally created, but due to settling out of court it was not. This now means if you do not go down the path of seeking to be the test case in court, you must access WorkSafe’s non-established, new or emerging treatments and services, or NENETS, policy to seek compensation for psychiatric assistance dogs costs.

In concluding Ron’s story, though, I warn that it does have a bittersweet ending. Ron passed away earlier this year from cancer. He came here to Parliament three weeks before he passed to talk about getting funding for the Defence Community Dogs program in Victoria. This will allow more dogs to be available to those with mental health issues like Ron. I pledged that I would do everything I could to make access to assistance dogs easier for people with mental health issues, especially PTSI. In fact I have made budget submissions to the government each and every year since I have been elected to have the defence dogs program funded in Victoria. I will be doing the same this year, and I hope that this vital and evidence-based program is finally funded.

Whilst my motion today does not refer to the Defence Community Dogs program, I just once again want to take the opportunity to promote its triple benefits. It is a win for the dog, who was a rescue dog; it is a win for the inmate, with a zero per cent recidivism rate for those who take part in the dog training program; and it is a win for our veterans. Having it funded would provide for a new stream of trained dogs, and it is my hope that it would be expanded to all frontline workers.

In his last act of selflessness before he died, Ron asked Benni if he would like to take back Yogi when Ron passed away from liver cancer. Benni of course said yes. Benni, who now runs a successful plumbing business, has taken Yogi to his home in New South Wales, where he is enjoying his new life. Such was the greatness of the man and his commitment to the cause that Ron was also recently awarded an OAM, a Medal of the Order of Australia, for his work in mental health. His story gives me goosebumps every time.

Post-traumatic stress disorder is known by many who suffer from the condition as an injury, hence the acronym PTSI. It is less stigmatising and recognises the biological impact that PTSI can have on someone. PTSI can rear its ugly head months or years after an incident or series of incidents. It can consist of night terrors, aggressive or emotional outbursts, trouble sleeping, flashbacks, mood swings, trouble concentrating, anxiousness, guilt and suspicion. On terminology, I understand that the government cannot just decide to change the term from PTSD to PTSI. What I am asking through this motion is that the government will acknowledge the term ‘PTSI’ as the preferred option by sufferers and use it where appropriate. Code 9 spokesperson Mark Thomas said, and I quote:

Having it renamed PTSI would be massively helpful. Far to many first responders do not recognise it as an injury …

Having worked on the front line I found it unsurprising but still worrying that our emergency service workers experience high rates of PTSI. According to the Australian emergency services, PTSI rates are directly impacted by dose, or the number of exposures to potential traumatic events. Routine and repeated exposure during police work means the risk of PTSI in our police is as high as 20 per cent, far beyond the 1 to 3 per cent prevalence in the general population.

I would also like to make it clear that my push for access to claims for psychiatric assistance dogs is not at the expense of other therapies. These dogs are not intended to replace any evidence-based psychotherapies, but to complement them. What works for some may not work for others. My contribution is also not intended to make the case for psychiatric assistance dogs, as I do not feel the need to; however, there are several studies that are encouraging of their use. Ron’s anecdote is obviously an incredible one, going from 17 psychotropic drugs each day to one furry friend around the clock. Further, a recent study by mindDog Australia, who supply and train dogs for people with psychological issues, found that assistance dogs, and I quote:

… decreased the use of psychiatric or other healthcare services in 46 per cent of participants …

I know most of you will not be surprised by Ron’s experience with WorkSafe, as their conduct has been under question for some time. Ombudsman Deborah Glass has on two occasions, in 2016 and 2019, handed down scathing reports regarding WorkSafe’s dealings with complex claims. These usually require longer term cover and are generally more costly to WorkSafe. Reflecting on 500 WorkSafe complaints, Ms Glass in her 2016 report said, and I quote:

… we found cases in which agents were working the system to delay and deny seriously injured workers the financial compensation to which they were entitled.

In 2019 Ms Glass said WorkSafe had not learned from the 2016 report and that changes still needed to be made to WorkSafe’s culture, despite the state government agreeing to the 15 recommendations of the earlier report. In the latter report she said, and I quote:

… this is the first time I have launched a fresh investigation into the same issue—

and that WorkSafe complaints were and are particularly painful. She further said, shockingly, that, and I quote:

If anything, the evidence strongly suggests that much of the impact of my 2016 report has been to drive these practices underground. Agent staff were told to be careful what they put in writing—in case the Ombudsman sees it.

The 2016 ABC Four Corners story Injury to Insult affirms that these problems are ingrained. Michael Tanner, principal at National Compensation Lawyers, told me, and I quote:

An injured workers journey through the Victorian Workcover system is difficult, tiring and traumatic …

where—

… legislation and corresponding Regulations are confusing and ever changing.

He says this unnecessarily creates a greater reliance on lawyers to fight for the most basic of rights, which often leads to protracted litigation and significant stress to some of the most vulnerable people. Further, are his comments, and I quote:

The guidelines associated with such funding remain difficult to interpret and restrictive, further the processing of such a request and time taken to determine such averages approximately 9 months.

To reiterate the issue, if someone is eligible for WorkCover as a result of psychological injuries and they would like to access their NENETS policy for a treatment option, such as an assistance dog, they will find that they, one, will not have a policy to look at to know if they are eligible for compensation payments or not; two, will not be able to rely on previous decisions to base their case on, because there is no precedent; three, will need to engage legal representation at significant cost because they will need to engage in the legal process to prove the evidence behind assistance dogs, despite others already having presented this evidence in the past; and, four, will likely wait many months for the outcome of their claim. This is a traumatic and risky process for people who already have mental and physical injuries.

To remedy this I am asking the government to do two things: firstly, review its NENETS policy to ensure that future claims for canine and equine therapies treating PTSI are considered without delay and not unfairly denied in the future; and, secondly, ensure that WorkSafe’s NENETS policy is publicly available and notes available compensation for different types of treatments and services, including the criteria to make such a claim. This will allow transparency for those seeking claims and for their legal representatives.

My office has canvassed the issue and discussed it with many interested parties. This motion is supported by the Community Advocacy Alliance, including former police commissioner Kel Glare; the Blue Ribbon Foundation; Maurice Blackburn Lawyers; National Compensation Lawyers; Code 9 representatives, comprising many current and former police officers; Ron Fenton’s family and friends; and many, many others. I have also spoken to many victims of this dreadful injury, and every single one of them have supported my campaign for this change. I would like to thank Kim, who is still fighting for WorkCover; Nicole and her dog, Scout; Pat and his dog, Lucy; Jill Dyson; and advocates such as Kath Maudsley and Glenn ‘Dutchy’ Holland, who began and continues to drive the great work of the Fighting PTSD VicPol campaign.

In conclusion, I would also like to thank Minister Stitt and her office, especially Matt, for their cooperation. As a non-government MP it is not often we raise an issue and the minister immediately recognises that what you are saying really is an issue, but you did on this occasion and I thank you for recognising this. It is not glamorous. It is not a populist issue, but it will help people who are really, really suffering. Lastly, I know Ron is up there watching, as will many of Ron’s supporters be online and many other current and previous emergency service workers with PTSI as well. Ron wanted Yogi’s law mandated within the system, and it is now at the chamber to make this happen. I commend this motion to the house.

 Ms WATT (Northern Metropolitan) (12:53): At the outset I want to thank Mr Grimley for bringing this motion to the Council and I want to take a moment to acknowledge his continued advocacy on important matters such as this, and can I extend my condolences to Ron’s family and Yogi. I understand that the Minister for Workplace Safety has indicated that she has committed and is committed to working closely with Mr Grimley on this matter. Providing fair compensation and support to injured workers is an absolute priority for the Andrews Labor government. That is why we have recently passed several important reforms through this place, such as provisional payments reforms and arbitration reforms. Every claim for compensation needs to be taken seriously because it is not just a claim; it is an injured worker who needs support, a family asking questions and an uncertain future. We continue to monitor trends in claims, services and treatments provided to injured workers.

Like this government, I am very passionate about improving workplace safety in our state. It is an area that I have worked in before. I have spent years talking directly to workers who were navigating the system. I have seen firsthand the inadequacies of the WorkSafe system to respond to trauma in the workplace, especially for those with existing trauma. Fifteen years later, while the system across our nation certainly is not perfect, it has come a long way in this state, with most of that thanks to this government.

While assistance dogs are a relatively new concept for the treatment of post-traumatic stress injury (PTSI), we have always demonstrated our openness to considering how we can make the WorkSafe system better, how we can provide better support to injured workers. All workers should make it home at the end of the day safe and without injury, but unfortunately we know that this is not the case. We know that in the event of an injury at work Victorian workers rely on the WorkCover scheme to support them through their recovery and return to work. But as much as we focus on the prevention of workplace accidents, tens of thousands of Victorian workers sustain an injury at work each year. Psychosocial hazards in the workplace can have a real and devastating impact on not only victims but all those around them, whether family, friends or colleagues.

As Mr Grimley notes in his motion, WorkSafe does currently have a policy for non-established, new or emerging treatments and services (NENETS), a policy which is publicly available on its website. Requests for assistance dogs for injured workers diagnosed with PTSI are made via this policy. WorkSafe agents can currently consider paying the reasonable costs of new and emerging treatments and services, including requests for psychiatric assistance dogs, to treat post-traumatic stress disorder in some circumstances. These guidelines support WorkSafe agent decision-making and provide clarity on the costs that WorkSafe considers reasonable. For a request of this nature to be considered by a WorkSafe agent a practitioner must provide clinical evidence of the safety and efficacy of the non-established, new and emerging treatments and services. Between 2019 and 2021 over 1000 requests for non-established, new and emerging treatments were made, and 735 were approved.

At the 2018 election the government committed to introducing legislation covering provisional payments for mental health WorkCover claims for every Victorian worker. We did what we said we would do, with the Parliament passing this legislation earlier this year. The provisional payment scheme commenced on 1 July this year. These landmark reforms provide injured workers with access to payments for medical and like expenses for up to 13 weeks from the date they submit a claim. It is a measure to give workers certainty of immediate support whether a claim is accepted or not, encouraging workers to put their hand up for help and seek the treatment that they need. It ensures there are no financial barriers to a worker accessing urgent medical treatment and recognises the importance of early intervention in ensuring a successful return to work and a better recovery. With more workers seeking help for mental health injuries it is vital that we remove barriers that prevent people from accessing care and support as soon as they need it.

Mental injury claims have grown significantly in recent years and are expected to account for a third of all workers compensation claims by 2030. The nature of these claims can be more complex and take longer to determine than physical injury claims. Before this reform, workers could wait up to five weeks before receiving payments to access treatment or support, with some stuck with stressful out-of-pocket costs. By covering costs such as GP visits, psychiatrist and psychologist appointments and medication, the provisional payments scheme removes financial barriers that delay workers getting the care they deserve. This scheme is an expansion of the government’s successful pilot providing provisional payments to police and emergency services workers and volunteers. This work is yet another example of the government’s preparedness to work with our frontline emergency services workers and to strengthen the support they receive. The pilot for these workers recognised the risks and occupational trauma that our hardworking police and emergency workers and volunteers are exposed to.

Another example of our Labor government’s commitment to improving the system that supports injured workers is our arbitration reforms. We are delivering on our commitment to improve the process for resolving workplace compensation disputes in line with the Victorian Ombudsman’s report regarding complex worker compensation claims. In May this year we passed legislation to introduce a new arbitration function within the Accident Compensation Conciliation Service. This reform will provide a low-cost, timely and effective alternative to the court process for injured workers to achieve a fair resolution to disputed workers compensation claims. It will simplify the process for injured workers to dispute an adverse decision, mitigating the risk of secondary mental injuries or exacerbating a worker’s existing mental injury.

WorkSafe has a range of initiatives in place to support employers and employees to address the work-related factors that impact on the mental health of Victorian workers. WorkSafe’s WorkWell program is a five-year program delivered in partnership with the Victorian Department of Health to promote mental health and prevent mental injury in Victorian workplaces.

The $50 million WorkWell program has been extended to 23 December 2022 to mitigate the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the funded projects. There have been over 10 000 registered users of the WorkWell toolkit. WorkSafe also has a dedicated psychosocial inspectorate team which focuses on compliance within the occupational health and safety legislation with respect to psychosocial hazards in workplaces. WorkSafe is also recruiting a number of psychological health and safety specialists for the newly established psychological health and safety specialist unit, which will provide additional expertise to the inspectorate and investigative teams, and they are further building capability across the inspectorate to address workplace bullying, occupational violence and sexual harassment. WorkSafe has a wide range of non-statutory guidance material available to provide duty holders with detailed information about how to prevent and respond to workplace injuries to psychological health.

Psychological health and mental health is something that I have spoken about a bit in this place. This Labor government has sharpened our focus on improving mental health for all Victorians through the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System. The royal commission’s final report was handed down on 2 March, and it sets out a bold vision that will serve as our blueprint for delivering the biggest social reform in a generation. In response to this royal commission, the Andrews Labor government handed down the biggest ever single investment in the mental health system in the nation’s history: a historic $3.8 billion to start rebuilding our mental health system from the ground up. In this, there are genuinely landmark reforms to our mental health system, groundbreaking work that will significantly improve mental health care in this state—$3.8 billion to build the system from the ground up, all based on the experiences of the patients, clients and their families, those who have experienced the worst of a broken and outdated system. Indeed we saw this funding laid out in the 2021–22 state budget.

With the adult population spending about a third of their life at work, there is a vital role for workplaces in improving the mental health of Victorians, because this is a government that cares about mental health. For us, mental health is not just a talking point; it is something we are doing the hard work on, investing the money and rebuilding the system, and I am very proud of this. I am very proud to be a part of a government that walks the walk, not just on mental health but of course across a wide range of issues.

As I have already indicated, the government is undertaking significant reform to improve workers’ mental health and give them the confidence to seek support if they are struggling, but we also know that there is more work to be done. We are always looking to do better, to prevent more injuries, to provide better support and to help injured workers get back to work. That is why we are supporting this motion, and I am confident that we will be able to work together closely on the issue of psychiatric assistance dogs to treat post-traumatic stress injuries.

 Mr O’DONOHUE (Eastern Victoria) (13:03): I am pleased to rise on behalf of the opposition and indicate the opposition’s support for this motion, motion 622. It is a very important motion because it goes to the mental wellbeing of those who have served our state and our community, who have put themselves at risk but have suffered as a result. The motion highlights some of the clear challenges and deficiencies in the way the system currently operates. Point (1)(d) says:

it can take approximately nine months to approve a psychiatric assistance dog claim to treat post-traumatic stress injuries … as opposed to a 27-day average for general mental health claims and a seven-day average for physical injury claims …

And point (e):

WorkSafe have previously approved psychiatric assistance dogs to treat PTSI; however, this policy does not hold precedent and is not legislated, meaning that each claimant must undergo an extensive and exhaustive legal process, causing additional financial and emotional stress …

That is just deeply disappointing and simply not good enough—that here we are, after all the talk, as Ms Watt referred to, from the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System and the billions of dollars, talking off the shopping list of government priorities, but a very simple process and a very simple policy to be implemented has not yet been done and as a result frontline responders, who have suffered and have been injured, are being denied the treatment and the benefit of a therapy companion animal.

Now, this is not a new topic, and I am pleased that at the last election, when I was Shadow Minister for Police, we had a policy to expand the companion therapy dogs program to the Tarrengower and Langi Kal Kal prisons and to provide resources to enable that to occur. Whilst the government has taken some steps to consider companion therapy dog training at our prisons, it has not gone as far as it could, because there is a clear demand for these services. As Mr Grimley highlighted and referred to, the story of Yogi and Benni from the Bathurst prison and the bond that they share, and they share again now with the sad passing of Ron, is a remarkable story. It is a beautiful story, and it is a story that could be replicated many times over if just a few dollars from those billions of dollars that Ms Watt referred to were allocated to this very important policy initiative—an initiative, as I mentioned, that was committed to by the opposition over three years ago and that the government has had now many years to replicate.

Now, Mr Grimley referred to Mr Fenton and his remarkable story, and I just want to quote extensively from an article by John Silvester, the well-known Age journalist. John Silvester has written many articles about Ron and about Benni and about Yogi, and I have picked the one dated 25 May 2018, ‘The crook, the copper and their four-legged mate’, which I think succinctly sums up the points that many of these stories, and those written by other journalists, make. It says:

The policeman and the crook had never met, yet they are linked by one act of random bastardry that nearly cost the cop his life—and another of unexpected humanity that certainly saved it.

Ron Fenton has considered taking his own life … weighed down by physical disabilities from his near-fatal shooting and the mental scars of post-traumatic stress.

His sleep was shattered with vivid night terrors that 17 psychotropic drugs could not control. In the dreams he relived his near-drowning—when working in Search and Rescue, he was caught under a log in a fast-flowing river—or when he was shot in the back of the head with a military-grade rifle and then left on the road as life slowly drained from him.

Meanwhile, 800 kilometres away in Bathurst Prison, Benni—an inmate serving 18 months for drug offences—was training a chocolate Labrador as a trauma dog.

When Benni learned “Yogi” was going to a damaged cop, he asked about Fenton’s condition. “He was given a rundown of my problems and would wake up and mimic my symptoms,” Ron says.

Benni trained Yogi—a rescue dog that faced being put down—for six months. “It was one of the best things I have ever done. You have all this time on your hands and you can use it to do some good. They should offer [the program] in every jail.

“It is a win-win,” Benni adds. “You save the dog, help a veteran with psychological problems, give the inmate a sense of purpose and give back to the community.”

The article goes on to say:

One night in a motel Ron was heading towards a traumatic nightmare when Yogi jumped on the bed to wake him. It has been the same ever since; Yogi sleeps in Ron’s room and gently intervenes before the terrors strangle his night.

Yogi now pushes his paw on a pressure pad to activate a bedroom lamp before waking the former policeman, so he is not traumatised by the dark.

“I doubt I would be here if it wasn’t for Yogi. I’d be under the ground. He is with me 24/7.”

The story goes on to describe more about the minimal cost of this program and the enormous benefit it delivers.

So this is a very sensible motion. It is eminently affordable, and I have never been able to understand, over the last three years, why we have these roadblocks, why we have these challenges. Again, as Mr Grimley mentioned, there is zero recidivism, that I am aware of, of those involved in the Bathurst program in training dogs, and Benni is a great example: he has got on with his life, is running his own business and has made such a success. That success could be repeated many more times over—the benefit to the animal, the prisoner and the frontline veteran who suffered these injuries. The government should expedite it; they should deal with these issues and fix it as quickly as possible.

Before concluding I just want to say what a privilege it was to attend Ron Fenton’s living wake, which was held on Monday, 22 February 2021. I had never attended a living wake before, and I was apprehensive, I must say, about attending such an event. But it was fantastic to be there with so many current and former members of Victoria Police and others who have done so much to protect our community. Ron was in fantastic spirits that day, and it is a tribute to him that he was prepared to put on such an event. It was a very happy event with many laughs and many stories told.

I was also privileged to attend Ron’s funeral on 19 April, after his passing on 13 April this year. The Victoria Police chapel is a remarkable part of the Victoria Police Academy. As most members I am sure would know, it was a Catholic seminary before it was in the police academy, and the chapel has been retained in all its beautiful glory as a place to celebrate the passing of respected police members as well as for graduation ceremonies when the weather is not good. The chief commissioner, Shane Patton, gave a fantastic address, as did members of Ron’s family, celebrating his life, celebrating what he achieved and celebrating his courage. It was a passion of Ron’s that the benefits of dogs such as Yogi be available to as many members as possible who have suffered similar injuries to Ron’s.

It is greatly disappointing that we are at this point where Mr Grimley had to bring on a motion to bring it to the government’s attention. I am very pleased that the Minister for Workplace Safety is in the chamber today. It is pleasing to hear that she has taken an interest in this issue. I would implore her to do whatever needs to be done to ensure that this program can be rolled out as broadly and as widely as needed and to use the resources of our prisoner population, which will help address the ever-growing recidivism rate in Victoria. It is just one other tool, one other way that we can help those who have helped our community so much and given so much and enable them to continue with their life as best as they can.

 Mr MEDDICK (Western Victoria) (13:13): I will keep my contribution very brief, as I am conscious that there are others who do wish to contribute. I thank Mr Grimley for bringing on this motion and for his continued advocacy on this particular issue. The assistance that post-traumatic stress injury sufferers receive from companion and assistance animals is very real and very significant. What we are hearing today and what we will hear from other speakers is how regulation—when it boils down to it—has failed to achieve just outcomes. Today on this very important motion we have an opportunity to remove any issues that allow bureaucracy to get in the way of common sense. Supporting this motion will be relieving PTSI victims of a financial burden and supporting their ongoing mental, emotional and physical health. The caring relationship between human and non-human animals is vitally important to both, and in the case of support animals we see in a very obvious way just how important those relationships are.

The English poet John Donne said, ‘No man is an island’. When we refer to this motion, often those suffering from PTSI do not feel comfortable speaking to other people. They suffer in silence, and this leads to terrible outcomes. So their support or companion animal becomes the most important being in their life. They are not just their friend, they are their confidant. They are there at their lowest points, and they are there to give them comfort when they are suffering from all of those things, those symptoms, that Mr Grimley put earlier on. They literally become the most important being in their life, and this is why I will be supporting Mr Grimley’s motion. I find it unfathomable that those who are suffering have been denied access to funding to support and provide care for that special friend, that confidant, the one they know that at the end of the day they can trust. I commend the motion to the house.

 Ms PATTEN (Northern Metropolitan) (13:15): I too am very pleased to rise to speak to this motion. I had the privilege of meeting Ron Fenton and Yogi a year or so ago. Not only did Yogi bring joy to Ron and assist Ron; he actually really could fill a room. He was a really wonderful—I do not know if you can say it—charismatic dog. He really was—

Mr Grimley: Beautiful eyes.

Ms PATTEN: Gorgeous, gorgeous eyes. I think, listening to the story about the background of the connection between Benni and Yogi and Ron, it has got all the makings of a great film. I was just thinking while I was sitting in the chair who would play Ron. I am putting my hand up for Sam Neill for Ron; I think he would be happy with that. But it also reminded me of another film, where we saw the beautiful work that dogs can do as therapy. I think I would commend a film called Backtrack Boys, which again showed that relationship that dogs and people can have and the therapeutic effect—nigh on medical effect—that they can have. It really is wonderful to see, and I am really pleased that Mr Grimley is advocating on this issue. I am pleased to see the minister is in the chamber as well, so I certainly hope that we do see moves in this area.

We have seen dogs being used in a whole range of areas. We are seeing assistance dogs being provided to victims and witnesses in the courts now. We are seeing dogs in the prison system, and certainly Mr O’Donohue referred back to the Bathurst trial. We are seeing that dogs in the court system have actually had a really positive impact particularly on the victims of crime, where they can calm them and they can reduce the trauma of the whole experience. In actual fact it has reduced the instances of retrials, so it has had a very clear impact in that area.

But directly to Mr Grimley’s motion about those that are suffering from post-traumatic stress injury (PTSI), we know that our frontline workers are really over-represented in those statistics and we need to be doing everything to prevent that. But we also need to be doing everything that we can to look at those new and emerging treatments and services, and in many ways WorkSafe is one of the perfect places to be doing that. Certainly I have raised this here, and just in the brief few minutes I have left I would just also like to raise some other emerging therapies, and those include MDMA. Now, someone said to me, ‘That’s like puppies and pingers’, this speech, but it is absolutely not. These are, absolutely, trained assistance dogs who are trained in the way that we heard Benni had trained Yogi—extraordinary. And when I talk about MDMA I am talking about a pharmaceutical-grade drug in a controlled, clinical setting with a therapist, so it bears no relation. It is working and we have the evidence, yet every time we have actually tried to see this new emerging therapy being used, particularly for PTSI, it has been refused by WorkSafe and many other organisations.

In the US they are in stage 3 trials for MDMA therapy for PTSI, and that is going to the Food and Drug Administration at the moment. It is running out of the University of California plus the University of New York. It is showing extraordinary results, single-treatment results—one treatment and they are getting results. They are literally curing PTSI through this substance. I implore the government that we do look at these non-established, new or emerging treatments and services, NENETS, that Mr Grimley has raised today in the like of therapy dogs. But I would certainly like to see other treatments that are also doing this. We have got 35 clinical psychiatrists in Australia now seeking to use MDMA for this exact thing. I commend this motion, and I hope it opens the door for new and emerging therapies, particularly for people with PTSI and particularly for our frontline workers.

 Mr LIMBRICK (South Eastern Metropolitan) (13:21): Health care is highly regulated in Australia. When it comes to approved therapies, we have the Medical Services Advisory Committee, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee and the Prostheses List Advisory Committee that all make recommendations regarding items on the medical benefits schedule, the pharmaceutical benefits scheme and the Australian Department of Health’s prostheses list. Only interventions and medications approved by the Medical Services Advisory Committee and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee are funded by Medicare. Some would argue that all of this regulation ensures that only safe and effective medicine is provided in Australia. No doubt that is true to an extent, but it can also stifle innovation. It can take a very long time for low-risk and highly effective treatments to navigate the red tape of the health bureaucracy. We are about to see how ineffective and overcautious this approach is as the federal government rolls out the new prescription model for nicotine vaping, another innovation.

WorkSafe Victoria and the TAC have a great opportunity to embrace innovation through the non-established, new or emerging treatments and services policy. This is clearly a significant challenge to ensure that only appropriate and effective therapies are funded. However, there are two key risks: firstly, funding and providing treatment that is ineffective or potentially harmful and, secondly, denying treatment that later turns out to be safe and effective. Research published in the Australian Health Review in 2020 showed that between March 2017 and March 2019 it was far more common for effective treatments to be denied than for ineffective treatments to be funded, with 21 effective claims being denied and five ineffective claims being granted. Mr Grimley has focused on one particular form of treatment with the example of Ron Fenton and his dog Yogi that provided immense benefit in alleviating his symptoms of work-related post-traumatic stress injury. The research paper that I previously referred to closed with this comment, which is relevant to the debate today:

At this stage, the database of 539 unique entries has not been made available to external clinicians or researchers, but a process to enable this is currently being considered to better facilitate transparency and to enable surveillance and outcomes research, as well as mediation of disputes over treatment options.

This goes to the heart of Mr Grimley’s motion. While the example of Ron and Yogi highlights the significance of canine therapies and why WorkSafe should update their policy on this, a clear and transparent approach more broadly should be able to reduce the number of effective therapies that are denied and reduce the need for injured people to engage legal representation in order to access effective treatment. The Liberal Democrats will support this motion.

 Mr ONDARCHIE (Northern Metropolitan) (13:24): I rise today to speak to Mr Grimley’s motion about support for frontline emergency services workers and their mental health, and I want to put on record our thanks to Mr Grimley for bringing this to the table today. I am also hopeful that the government will get right behind this. I agree with point (1) absolutely, that frontline emergency services people have a higher rate of mental illness as a result of their work.

I have many, many friends in the job—for those who know what that means—many friends in the job, some at very high levels with braid. And I have to tell you those close mates of mine that have been mates for such a long, long time have done it pretty tough. One of my mates, who went into the academy at about the same time that I headed off into a different part of my career, as Mr Grimley would know, was a two-oh, so he would know the sort of years that we are talking about. He had a pretty tough life in the job, a stressful life. He had times when he had to arrest child sex offenders, attend fatal motor vehicle collisions and deal with domestic violence and the breakdown of his own relationships.

Bob was a good mate. He came around to my house one night for a chat and a beer and chatted about how tough things were, but he gave me every confidence that things were going to be okay. The next day he took his life. I vowed at that time through the sadness of being at his funeral, which the police were very kind to get around and do some important things with, that my other mates in the job I was going to keep an eye out for all the time. I have mates that had to attend the tragedy on the Eastern Freeway and had other sadness, such as when a dog attacked an elderly gentleman and the gentleman passed away, and my mate was the first copper on the scene. I made a point of taking the morning off work the next day and grabbing him and saying, ‘Come over for a cup of tea and a biscuit and have a chat’, and he sat at my house and emptied his heart. I have got many, many other examples as well of people in the job as fireys, as ambos, as hospital workers, as coppers, and I think it is incumbent on us to look out for them. That is why I am grateful that Mr Grimley has brought this motion to the house. I will not go through the details of it because he has done that so well today.

Using canines—assistance dogs—and equine therapy is really important. As colleagues know, I am an ambassador for Guide Dogs Victoria and do a lot of work with them and their assistance dogs. In fact we have our own guide dog in our family, Nala, who has been here to Parliament House on a number of occasions. She gets around the community and talks to people; it helps—the work she does as an assistance dog and an ambassador for Guide Dogs Victoria.

I just want to say that this is one of the most important things we could be doing today. I am hopeful that Minister Stitt, who is here at the table, will get behind this. I am hopeful the government will quickly move to less talk and more action on this to get behind the tragic and high rate of mental illness in our frontline workers. I support the motion, Mr Grimley. Thank you so much.

 Dr CUMMING (Western Metropolitan) (13:27): I rise to speak in support of Mr Grimley’s motion. The Department of Veterans Affairs has a psychiatric assistance dog program, and under this program the DVA will pay for the supply of a fully trained and registered psychiatric assistance dog. You can request reimbursement for the costs associated with maintaining the welfare of that dog, which includes annual maintenance costs of up to $573 per quarter and yearly vet costs, including vaccinations and medication, pet insurance and food, and unexpected vet bills and gap payments. In the event that the assistance dog has any unexpected vet bills or you are out of pocket due to the difference between those bills, the DVA will reimburse that amount. The DVA also provides the actual dogs. One part of the DVA program is that they only provide this financial assistance for dogs that are part of their program.

I fully support that this government, either under WorkCover or under their push from the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System, should provide this kind of financial support. Seeing that the DVA can do this, there is a way forward. The government can easily pick this up, easily replicate it and easily start it, even tomorrow. They should remove all the barriers. WorkCover should not make it difficult for people to provide this kind of assistance. It has been said in this place before that when somebody is in need, they should just get that assistance straightaway. There should not be hurdles; there should not be barriers. It really should be a simple process. So I commend Mr Grimley on bringing this motion to this house today, and I believe that this government should take this wonderful suggestion on and do it tomorrow.

 Ms TAYLOR (Southern Metropolitan) (13:30): First of all, I would like to thank Mr Grimley for raising this very important matter. I really appreciate it. Certainly I know that the Minister for Workplace Safety has indicated she is committed to working closely with you on this issue as well, which is always good to know, because you know where the motion is going to head from today. So that is also very positive, and certainly it is very important to us to provide fair compensation and support injured workers. This is an absolute priority for our government, but I am reiterating it because it is very close to our hearts. But it is not just about the emotion and the sentiment; it is also about actions that we have taken to carry this through, and this is why we have recently passed several important reforms through this place, such as the provisional payments reforms and arbitration reforms. I believe Ms Watt spoke to these particular reforms, so I will not go further on that issue, but suffice to say it certainly reflects our dedication and commitment to injured workers—and I think that goes without saying as well.

Obviously every claim for compensation has to be taken seriously, and this goes without saying. I have seen up close some injured workers myself, and I will not go into specific examples, but suffice to say we are dealing with human beings. And I am not stating that to be patronising or condescending in any way. I am just stating that it is, at the end of the day, very personal for them and it is very moving and very difficult and can be a very challenging experience, and obviously making the process—for want of a better word—as comfortable and supportive as possible is certainly an optimal outcome, because at the end of the day it is not just a claim, it is an injured worker who needs support.

We do continue to monitor trends in claims, services and treatments provided to injured workers—this is certainly not a static space but a very active space—with good reason, because in conjunction, and I think noting the relevance of what we are discussing today, we should continue to always improve and ameliorate the way that such claims et cetera are handled, with good reason.

I will close on this argument: whilst assistance dogs are a relatively new concept for the treatment of post-traumatic stress injuries, we have always demonstrated our openness to considering how we can make the WorkCover system better, how we can provide better support to injured workers. So I think today is a very healthy discussion and certainly consistent with not only the aims but the actions of our government.

 Ms SHING (Eastern Victoria) (13:33): It is a real pleasure to rise today to thank Mr Grimley for bringing this motion to the house. It comes as no surprise to perhaps anyone in this chamber or indeed anyone who knows me that I am an ardent fan of the benefits of pet ownership, pet companionship, and also the work that dogs and indeed other animals can do in achieving significant benefits for us as their humans and also as the recipients of their attention and unconditional love. We know from vast experience across a range of different jurisdictions that dogs can achieve a power of good from creating a sense of connection, validation and self-worth in some of our most vulnerable and priority communities. Ms Patten has referred to Aboriginal Indigenous communities and also to people within our custodial system, and the prison pet partnership program is something which I have been a very big fan of, having owned greyhounds which have been through that program.

I want to also single out the work that is done within the court system to provide immediate assistance to those who are really struggling in formal and often very isolating and intimidating circumstances. Particularly in the Children’s Court and for victims of crime the presence of dogs can be immediately calming and immediately reassuring, and this has a profound and indeed very relevant impact on the administration of justice. It stands to reason, then, that work is undertaken in being better at understanding work-related injury and indeed understanding the way in which that can be addressed, such that recovery and rehabilitation are placed at the forefront of our ongoing assistance to those who need it most, and those who have been injured in the course of their work are given every opportunity to access the very same supports which animals, and dogs in particular, can provide. It is axiomatic therefore that I stand here today in support of this particular motion and join with others who have been very vocal in supporting the role of dogs in a range of health-related initiatives, including, particular to this motion, post-traumatic stress injury.

Trauma comes in many, many forms, and it is persistent and it is devastating. It often cuts lives short and sits alongside a litany of other health-related concerns. Treatment is hard, it is expensive and it is isolating. It will often not endure, and it is often not durable. This is where animals come in and provide at least for the extent of that animal’s lifetime the opportunity to provide ongoing reassurance and consistency in the love and the connection which we can find with animals. I am someone who will never be without a dog—at least one dog—in my life. I know that from my perspective they provide me with an enormous amount of balance, they provide me with an unconditional pair of ears and they provide me with constant engagement and connection and also the sense of needing to take care of someone else, which is so important to remaining connected, particularly in times of isolation. This is where I cannot see how it does not make perfect sense to broaden the scope of animal ownership and animal engagement to a setting where injury has been sustained and is causing such trauma, injury and indeed dislocation from the things that make us human and enable us to connect with ourselves, with the world around us and also with broader things like participation in employment, group community activities and being part of a community overall. So I commend Mr Grimley on bringing this motion to the house.

I am really looking forward to seeing that we continue to modernise our system of the treatment and care provided to those injured in the line of work, which might range from frontline service delivery, including in a pandemic—those sorts of traumatic events and duties which Mr Ondarchie referred to in his contribution—right through to the way in which stress-related injuries in the workplace can be addressed in what might be less apparently violent circumstances. We have a long way to go in recognising the impact that animals can have on our health and wellbeing. I am absolutely determined to continue to avail myself of those benefits. I know that many others in this chamber and this Parliament indeed receive that same love and care and attention from their animals, and I look forward to seeing this being rolled out more broadly so that those in a place of injury, vulnerability and need can access the same sort of care, love and attention to enable them to receive the treatment and indeed the best prospects of success and recovery they deserve.

Mr BARTON (Eastern Metropolitan)

Incorporated pursuant to order of Council of 7 September:

I rise to speak on motion 622 regarding the reformation of WorkSafe’s non-established, new or emerging treatments and services policy.

I will be supporting this motion today.

We know that injury in the workplace can mean many things and can have diverse and devastating consequences.

WorkSafe exists to both protect employees in their workplace and provide support to those whose workplace has failed to keep them safe.

This motion will make important reforms that ensure those who need access to new or emerging treatments such as assistance dog or equine therapy are not unfairly denied.

Those who have experienced physical and or mental injuries at work did not seek to injure themselves, yet they will likely live with this injury for the rest of their lives.

Animal therapies can be highly effective complementary treatments for post-traumatic stress injury (PTSI) alongside traditional psychological and cognitive brain therapies.

This motion is about compassion and supporting those who have found themselves in a highly vulnerable state through no fault of their own.

Making these complex claim processes simpler and allowing those with PTSI to access WorkCover for assistance dogs will make all the difference for these individuals.

I commend this motion to the house.

 Mr GRIMLEY (Western Victoria) (13:39): Thanks to everyone for their contributions today. It is fantastic. And I really appreciate Mr Ondarchie as well sharing his very personal story—I really do appreciate it. The fact that I mentioned before was that 20 per cent of emergency service workers have some form of post-traumatic stress injury, but I suspect that that figure is a lot higher than 20 per cent. I have always said that we should be doing everything we can to protect those that protect us. When many people run away from danger, they are the people that run towards it, and I think you see that quite often in the news bulletins. In particular on September 11 you saw all the fireys and the ambos and the police heading towards the danger while everybody else was running away. So we need to be doing all we can to help those who help us, and this is just one very small way that we can do that.

We talked about the costs. The costs are around $2000 per annum to maintain, to upkeep, an assistance dog for a person who is keeping an assistance dog, so we are not talking a lot of money. It is very, very small amount for the significant benefits that come out of it.

Once again, thank you, everybody, for supporting the motion. I do appreciate the government also moving the terminology towards ‘injury’—post-traumatic stress injury. I did note that was used quite often within the chamber by everybody—crossbenchers as well and the opposition—so thank you very much for moving from a ‘disorder’ to an ‘injury’. I really do appreciate it, and I look forward to the day in the not-too-distant future that Yogi’s law is properly mandated.

Motion agreed to.